Los Angeles daily herald., 1887-02-12
rhe ssreet.PaviDg Question.

0UAAAO0 Oy tItC nlct PioAiAiV'
The Ssreet.PaviDg Question.
The City Attorney has given his
opinion on the legal aspect of the
powers of the city, under our existing
Charter, to compel property-holders,
after complying with certain regula-
hons as to petition and time, to pave
{ he etrsets in front Of their property
He has reached the conclusion that
it has that power. We believe that
he is right. We know that our Char
ter was frsmed in this respect with a
view to that power existing in the
city. But afterwards, when the
principle was. family attempted to be
carried out, the power was contro-
verted on the same ground ihat was
commended for by certain San Fran
cisco property-holders under the IRON
clad Consolidation Act of that city.
Without looking into the question
criticalIy-and the exigencies OF
our case not being then of
the importance and bearing they
are now-public opinion settled
into the belief that if it was
impossible to compel street improve,
ments in San Francisco under the
Consolidation Act, it was also i'm
possible to compel them under our
City Charter. The fallacy OF the con-
clusion lay in the fact that the Con-
Dolidation Act was one thing and the
City Charter of Los Angeles was quite
another thing. So that the question
never having been seriously raised,
We we're content 10 drift along, accept
ing q popular notion as conclusion of
lsw instead of a legally determined
fact. Our City Attorney, however,
has had the question presented
10 him under state OF circumstances
which requires that it should be ex-
amined critically and not set aside on
account of a mere popular notion or
= Atradition based upon remote and
hasty conclusion. We are, therefore
dispoeed to believe with the City At
torney that the power exists under
oar present City Charter to compel
property-holders to do what it is mani
fest is indispensable to the well-being
and convenience of a growing city.
The last few days have been big with
argument in favor of the policy of
forcing property-holders on our prin-
cipal streets to properly pave them.
The condition OF our business thor
oaghfares has not only been dis
mace to our civilization, but has fur
mis- he'd the food for our enemies to in
jurc US with the thousands OF strangers
who have come here with view to
Investing their capital with us. But
some of our property holders who be-
1isv that the wayfaring public and
the municipality have rights as well
- those who are receivingmagnifcent
ren tails, have determined to bring this
Que stion to a head, and the Council
viii order block paved on one of our
prime ipal streets. The machinery OF
the Ch arter will be brought into use
10 put the experiment in motion, and
IL opposition arise the question will be
tested. We are disposed, however, to
think that there will be no contest,
for the improvement is as much
wanted by the property holders on
the block alluded to, as it is by the
public at large. The success of this
experiment will decide the issue. II
the owners of one or a series Of
blocks can be compelled to properly
pave the streets in front of their
property, the owners of property
elsewhere will have to accept the
situation, and fall into line. Perhaps
the strongest arguments advanced in
favor of the several drafts of bills de-
signed to bring Los Angeles under a
general law to take the place of our
Charter, has been based upon the
uhsneful condition of our streets
during the late storm. There was no
Dninssying actual and hnmiliating
1ncfs staring US in the face at every
atsp. But If We can show by actual
oxperience that there is modus
epsrundi under our present Charter 10
ouro the evil, our people will be con-
fsnt to let well enough alone, instead
of jeopardizing the future Of our city
b. accepting for its government a
0onnraI law which may be changed
~ the Legislature at its will. Los
Angeles cannot afford to tie itself to
llnkland and Sacramento, whose in